Evaluating benefits of stocking on sockeye recovery projections in a nutrient-enhanced mixed life history population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dam construction often blocks migration of anadromous sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), resulting in a residualized population that is often managed as landlocked kokanee. Anadromy resumes when a reconnection to the ocean is established; however, there may be selective pressure acting on threshold trait(s) affecting smolt timing and probability. While there may be interest in predicting persistence of anadromous and residual sockeye forms, this is difficult because the heritability of smolting in these populations is poorly known. We develop a fully density-dependent age-structured model to project abundances for both anadromous and resident sockeye. The model considers trophic interactions due to nutrient variation and the density-dependent consequences for smolting and adult returns. Moreover, it asks how each life history type will persist if a hatchery were used to promote anadromous sockeye through artificial selection. We show hatchery supplementation is unlikely to impact anadromous or resident sockeye significantly, although there is substantial prediction uncertainty suggested in projections. Our study suggests that providing passage for previous land-locked anadromous populations will lead to the return of anadromous fish in the short term, but long-term prospects are far from certain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".